Author
Topic: Atheists don't know shit. (Read 1754 times)

This has been circulating on the internet. How to respond? Or not respond?

Quote

An atheist was seated next to a little girl on an airplane and he turned to her and said, "Do you want to talk? Flights go quicker if you strike up a conversation with your fellow passenger."

The little girl, who had just started to read her book, replied to the total stranger, "What would you want to talk about?"

"Oh, I don't know," said the atheist. "How about why there is no God, or no Heaven or Hell, or no life after death?" as he smiled smugly.

"Okay," she said. "Those could be interesting topics but let me ask you a question first. A horse, a cow, and a deer all eat the same stuff - grass. Yet a deer excretes little pellets, while a cow turns out a flat patty, but a horse produces clumps. Why do you suppose that is?"

The atheist, visibly surprised by the little girl's intelligence, thinks about it and says, "Hmmm, I have no idea." To which the little girl replies, "Do you really feel qualified to discuss God, Heaven and Hell, or life after death, when you don't know shit?"

1) Cows usually have easy, regular, safe access to water provided by humans - their survival doesn't depend on not wasting water via poop. 2) Cows have a long history of domestication through which they've been bred to be less tough (tender meat / can't run away too far or fast) which may have resulted in weaker intestinal muscles as well i.e. smooth muscle less good at compacting the poop.

The only response I can think of is to simply say that the people who write little anecdotes like this should really learn how actual human beings interact with each other. Jack Chick-esque caricatures of how people talk make the necessary level of suspension of disbelief far too high to take anything like this seriously.

Logged

"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

Ha! Found something really interesting - fits somewhat with my water theory but clearly it's more complicated than that:

Quote

Michigan workers developed a scoring system to evaluate fresh manure. Consistency is dependent on water and fiber content of the manure, type of feed, and passage rate. A scale of 1 to 5 is listed below with a score 3 optimal.

Score 1. This manure is very liquid with the consistency of pea soup. The manure may actually "arc" for the rump of the cow. Excess protein or starch, too much mineral, or lack of fiber can lead to this score. Excess urea in the hind gut can create an osmotic gradient drawing water in the manure. Cow with diarrhea will be in this category.

Score 2.This manure will appear runny and does not form a distinct pile. It will measure less than on inch in height and splatters when it hits the ground or concrete. Cows on lush pasture will commonly have this type of manure. Low fiber or a lack of functional fiber can also lead to this manure score.

Score 3. This is the optimal score! The manure has a porridge-like appearance, will stack up 1 ½ to 2 inches, have several concentric rings, a small depression or dimple in the middle, make a plopping sound with it hits concrete floors, and it will stick to the toe of your shoe.

Score 4. The manure is thicker, will stick to your shoe, and stacks up over 2 inches. Dry cows and older heifers may have this type of manure (this may reflect that low quality forages are fed and/or a shortage of protein). Adding more grain or protein can lower this manure score.

Score 5. This manure appears as firm fecal balls. Feed a straw based diet or dehydration would contribute to this score. Cows with a digestive blockage may exhibit this score.

This is pretty disgusting, and I'm not talking about excrement. Whoever wrote this did so with malice aforethought.

First off, it presents a scenario designed to provoke one's protective instincts - an adult male striking up a conversation with a little girl he doesn't know. So already the reader is subtly encouraged to support and defend the little girl's side.

Second, it has him talking about a really weighty subject, the existence of God and heaven/hell with her, although she's presumably not knowledgeable about it. So it sets up the atheist as a smug bully who's picking on a poor little girl. There's also a possible stalker vibe there, though I'm not as sure about that.

Third, the stupid excrement joke, which plays on both of the points I mentioned previously to have the little girl show up the atheist and make the reader feel proud of her for putting the atheist in his place.

In short, this meme is a subtle, well-crafted, malicious one that's designed to present atheists as pathetic bullies who can't even successfully convince a (supposedly) impressionable little girl of their point of view.

So, responses. One is to ask the person if they think that atheists stalk random children they don't know, as this meme suggests - instead of trying to rebut the meme, counter it. It's a little aggressive, but on the other hand, I suspect that most people won't have thought over this meme to realize how insidious it is.

Another is to point out the falseness of this meme - that atheists don't approach random strangers (especially strange children) to preach 'doctrine' at them, etc.

A third is to compare and contrast actual atheist behavior with actual Christian behavior - for example, that evangelical Christians present their beliefs as fact to children that they don't know very well, if at all, whereas atheists tend to only discuss things like this with people who initiate it with them.

I suspect that most people won't have thought over this meme to realize how insidious it is.

I suspect every theist that hears it instantly knows exactly what it is. A sneaky joke about theist child outsmarting an adult atheist. It operates as designed - to make the atheist look overbearing and out of line making inappropriate conversation with the child.It will resonate with theists whether or not atheists can make a valid criticism of the tactics.They'll never be ashamed of laughing at that meme. If not directly at us then certainly behind our backs.

We can tell them it contains disguised offensive messages and misrepresents atheists. But their minds are going exactly the other way - that our atheism is so GROSSLY wrong that a little grubby jibe at us is a perfectly legitimate tactic.

I think they'll pay more attention if the joke is turned right back on them - ask the person telling the joke to explain the poop. Then pick up the debate from there - depending on progress (and their degree of ignorance on poop) maybe circle back to the ethics of the meme and using it to spread malicious perceptions about atheists.

This has been circulating on the internet. How to respond? Or not respond?

There are so many logical fallacies with this thing that it's kind of hard to know where to start, really. If I were feeling generous, I would probably just point out that it is beyond absurd to imply that lacking knowledge of biology automatically disqualifies someone from discussing philosophy and/or theology. That's the only part that's even remotely pertinent. Everything else is sardonic rubbish.

I suspect every theist that hears it instantly knows exactly what it is.

You're giving most people too much credit here. I'm not saying they don't think about things (though many don't), but they aren't going to be the kind of people to analyze a joke like this. People who think of themselves as on top - as indeed, many theists do - generally aren't going to spend a lot of time or effort thinking about the implications of something like this. They're just going to look at it as a funny joke at an atheist's expense.

I fly a lot... and never once have I been approached by an atheist wanting to spread the good news of the "religion" of atheism. Xians, on the other hand have accosted me numerous times.I will try the poop story in the future on them...

Logged

If xian hell really exists, the stench of the burning billions of us should be a constant, putrid reminder to the handful of heavenward xians how loving your god is. - neopagan

I'm not saying they don't think about things (though many don't), but they aren't going to be the kind of people to analyze a joke like this.

Maybe they won't analyse it as we might - but I think they'll pick up the vibe of it - including the less explicit vilification messages.

I'm going on what I've seen when racist jokes and blond jokes and poofter jokes are being told. The people telling them and laughing at them are fully aware they are crossing a line. Most of these jokes don't circulate in the open - the audiences are selected - the tellers are acutely aware that the jokes are offensive to broader audiences. It's the very "wrongness" of these joke that they are attracted to - an opportunity to feed their prejudice against the out-group and bolster the security of being accepted by the in-group.

What I wonder about is how ill-tempered and foul-mouthed the little girl is (I'm guessing she's not intented to be much older than 11 or 12). Is that the kind of behavior the writer wants little kids to emulate? The atheist isn't much of a 'villain', considering that the 'hero' comes off as much nastier.

I am not surprised at the "stupid atheist" so-called joke. The whole scenario is creepy-- an adult male trying to talk to a child they don't know about god and religion? That kind of behavior is far more likely to come from a theist than an atheist, as has been discussed.

However, I am a bit surprised that the punchline has the little religious girl cursing. If I was going to counter the joke to a theist, I would focus on that aspect:

"Is that a good example of how to witness to an unbeliever, by putting unnecessary foul language into a child's mouth?"

This so-called joke appeared on my facebook page accompanied by a picture of a bratty looking kid with her feet up on the chair in front of her. There were many kudos from fundy types regarding the kid's intelligence and from atheists on the guy trying to enlighten the kid. This was my comment:

"Too bad rude, insensitive behavior has to be applauded. As if an atheist would engage a child in such a debate. And as if any well raised child would respond with a joke that is not appropropriate for a kid her age."

I didn't "share" it but I had to comment. My comment got 4 "likes" and someone replied "like twice"

« Last Edit: August 15, 2013, 11:25:54 PM by LoriPinkAngel »

Logged

It doesn't make sense to let go of something you've had for so long. But it also doesn't make sense to hold on when there's actually nothing there.

This has been circulating on the internet. How to respond? Or not respond?

Quote

An atheist was seated next to a little girl on an airplane and he turned to her and said, "Do you want to talk? Flights go quicker if you strike up a conversation with your fellow passenger."

The little girl, who had just started to read her book, replied to the total stranger, "What would you want to talk about?"

"Oh, I don't know," said the atheist. "How about why there is no God, or no Heaven or Hell, or no life after death?" as he smiled smugly.

"Okay," she said. "Those could be interesting topics but let me ask you a question first. A horse, a cow, and a deer all eat the same stuff - grass. Yet a deer excretes little pellets, while a cow turns out a flat patty, but a horse produces clumps. Why do you suppose that is?"

The atheist, visibly surprised by the little girl's intelligence, thinks about it and says, "Hmmm, I have no idea." To which the little girl replies, "Do you really feel qualified to discuss God, Heaven and Hell, or life after death, when you don't know s**t?"

And then she went back to reading her book.

It is always interesting to see someone who bases her faith on ignorance: In this case, ignorance about the digestive system of herbivores.

Logged

Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

This has been circulating on the internet. How to respond? Or not respond?

Quote

An atheist was seated next to a little girl on an airplane and he turned to her and said, "Do you want to talk? Flights go quicker if you strike up a conversation with your fellow passenger."

The little girl, who had just started to read her book, replied to the total stranger, "What would you want to talk about?"

"Oh, I don't know," said the atheist. "How about why there is no God, or no Heaven or Hell, or no life after death?" as he smiled smugly.

"Okay," she said. "Those could be interesting topics but let me ask you a question first. A horse, a cow, and a deer all eat the same stuff - grass. Yet a deer excretes little pellets, while a cow turns out a flat patty, but a horse produces clumps. Why do you suppose that is?"

The atheist, visibly surprised by the little girl's intelligence, thinks about it and says, "Hmmm, I have no idea." To which the little girl replies, "Do you really feel qualified to discuss God, Heaven and Hell, or life after death, when you don't know shit?"

And then she went back to reading her book.

My question would be: "Who are these imaginary atheists you keep thinking are real? I mean, what atheist would strike up a conversation like that with a little girl? I've never met that atheist, have you? Of course not! because you made them up."

-Nam

Logged

Quote from: David Garrett Arnold

there are oceans of words aged in prayer,against geometric lines, and cloudbeaten skies;credulous allure—slowly captivated in hearts fair—trees and flowers bloomed in grace upon one's eyes.

Well shit, I'm sorry, but this is how I respond. I am an atheist, but you see, I do know shit. I'm certified in nutrient management, so I work with farmers designing and managing shit. For instance, a mature Holstein cow excretes approximately 13 US gallons of shit per day, a 1000 pound horse excretes approximately 55 pounds of shit per day. If the young lady is wondering about pigs, I have that information too, as well as turkeys, anything she wants to know.